List of no-action attacks.Dynamic vs Static BonusesPhalanx tactics and buildsCrivens! A Pictsies GuideGood
Powers to intentionally miss withMr. Cellophane: How to be unnoticedWay's to fire around cornersCrits: what their really worthRetroactive bonus vs Static bonus.Runepriest handbook & discussion threadHoly Symbols to hang around your neckWays to Gain or Downgrade ActionsList of bonuses to saving throwsThe Ghost with the Most (revenant handbook)

Pocket Protector Pixie Stealth Knight. Maximizing the defender's aura by being in an ally's/enemy's square.

Yakuza NinjIntimiAdin: Perma-stealth Striker that offers a little protection for ally's, and can intimidate bloodied enemies. Very Strong.

Chargeburgler with cheese Ranged attacks at the end of a charge along with perma-stealth. Solid, could be overpowered if tweaked.

Void Defender Defends giving a penalty to hit anyone but him, then removing himself from play. Can get somewhat broken in epic.

Scry and Die Attacking from around corners, while staying hidden. Moderate to broken, depending on the situation.

Skimisher Fly in, attack, and fly away. Also prevents enemies from coming close. Moderate to Broken depending on the enemy, but shouldn't make the game un-fun, as the rest of your team is at risk, and you have enough weaknesses.

Indestructible Simply won't die, even if you sleep though combat. One of THE most abusive character in 4e.

Death's Gatekeeper A fun twist on a healic, making your party "unkillable". Overpowered to Broken, but shouldn't actually make the game un-fun, just TPK proof.

Death's Gatekeeper mk2, (Stealth Edition) Make your party "unkillable", and you hidden, while doing solid damage. Stronger then the above, but also easier for a DM to shut down. Broken, until your DM get's enough of it.

Domination and Death Dominate everything then kill them quickly. Only works @ 30, but is broken multiple ways.

The bonus is built into the weapon. 2-handed weapons have a larger damage size (or some other feature like reach).

how would you then treat long sword swung with two hands? same damage? Or mace? I guarantee you that the effect is bigger.

Or lets say Ogre with 22 str grabs a human sized greatsword. he can wield it effectively with one hand for 1d12+6 dmg. but what if he grabs it with two hands(the grip IS long enough)? damage still the same?

The bonus is built into the weapon. 2-handed weapons have a larger damage size (or some other feature like reach).

how would you then treat long sword swung with two hands? same damage? Or mace? I guarantee you that the effect is bigger.

Or lets say Ogre with 22 str grabs a human sized greatsword. he can wield it effectively with one hand for 1d12+6 dmg. but what if he grabs it with two hands(the grip IS long enough)? damage still the same?

List of no-action attacks.Dynamic vs Static BonusesPhalanx tactics and buildsCrivens! A Pictsies GuideGood
Powers to intentionally miss withMr. Cellophane: How to be unnoticedWay's to fire around cornersCrits: what their really worthRetroactive bonus vs Static bonus.Runepriest handbook & discussion threadHoly Symbols to hang around your neckWays to Gain or Downgrade ActionsList of bonuses to saving throwsThe Ghost with the Most (revenant handbook)

Pocket Protector Pixie Stealth Knight. Maximizing the defender's aura by being in an ally's/enemy's square.

Yakuza NinjIntimiAdin: Perma-stealth Striker that offers a little protection for ally's, and can intimidate bloodied enemies. Very Strong.

Chargeburgler with cheese Ranged attacks at the end of a charge along with perma-stealth. Solid, could be overpowered if tweaked.

Void Defender Defends giving a penalty to hit anyone but him, then removing himself from play. Can get somewhat broken in epic.

Scry and Die Attacking from around corners, while staying hidden. Moderate to broken, depending on the situation.

Skimisher Fly in, attack, and fly away. Also prevents enemies from coming close. Moderate to Broken depending on the enemy, but shouldn't make the game un-fun, as the rest of your team is at risk, and you have enough weaknesses.

Indestructible Simply won't die, even if you sleep though combat. One of THE most abusive character in 4e.

Death's Gatekeeper A fun twist on a healic, making your party "unkillable". Overpowered to Broken, but shouldn't actually make the game un-fun, just TPK proof.

Death's Gatekeeper mk2, (Stealth Edition) Make your party "unkillable", and you hidden, while doing solid damage. Stronger then the above, but also easier for a DM to shut down. Broken, until your DM get's enough of it.

Domination and Death Dominate everything then kill them quickly. Only works @ 30, but is broken multiple ways.

I think 1/2 the Strength modifier should be added to any weapon attack made with a 2-handed weapon (or a 1-handed weapon swung with 2 hands). But I also advocate for more DPR with Two-Weapon Fighting, so take it for what you will.

I think you could make a strong argument that two hands isn't really helping you as much as you'd like in a combat situation. I'm not saying you can't make the other argument, because it is easy to make.

A human wielding a longsword in one hand can put 'less' behind the swing than he can with two hands. We all agree with that. However, it is not as if these combats are simulating someone taking a longsword and making baseball bat haymaker swings with them. So this is the argument that I could use to do away with the two handed argument. Just because an Ogre can wield it in one hand or two, the weapon is simply so small that the amount of useful force behind the item is small. This is perhaps the same reason STR shouldn't add to finesse weapons.

I'm playing devil's advocate a bit, but hopefully my argument makes some sense.Maybe instead of 1/2 str as an add, perhaps just a flat +1 (or die size increaes as suggested earlier). That has no scaling and very predictable results/issues.

Does this mean a dwarf could pick up a weapon and wield it in two hand for two die size increases. Very interesting result - eh?

Currently running a playtest, weekly, online D&D Next Session using a virtual table system called roll20.

I think you could make a strong argument that two hands isn't really helping you as much as you'd like in a combat situation. I'm not saying you can't make the other argument, because it is easy to make.

A human wielding a longsword in one hand can put 'less' behind the swing than he can with two hands. We all agree with that. However, it is not as if these combats are simulating someone taking a longsword and making baseball bat haymaker swings with them. So this is the argument that I could use to do away with the two handed argument. Just because an Ogre can wield it in one hand or two, the weapon is simply so small that the amount of useful force behind the item is small. This is perhaps the same reason STR shouldn't add to finesse weapons.

I'm playing devil's advocate a bit, but hopefully my argument makes some sense.Maybe instead of 1/2 str as an add, perhaps just a flat +1 (or die size increaes as suggested earlier). That has no scaling and very predictable results/issues.

Does this mean a dwarf could pick up a weapon and wield it in two hand for two die size increases. Very interesting result - eh?

It doesn't only mean bashing with full strength. You simply have more control over weapon with two handed grip for either more powerfull or more precise strikes, both mean in D&D math more damage.

It can be one and a half mod, +1 fixed, bigger damage die but it mush show that is better to two handed grip than single handed one.

I think you could make a strong argument that two hands isn't really helping you as much as you'd like in a combat situation. I'm not saying you can't make the other argument, because it is easy to make.

A human wielding a longsword in one hand can put 'less' behind the swing than he can with two hands. We all agree with that. However, it is not as if these combats are simulating someone taking a longsword and making baseball bat haymaker swings with them. So this is the argument that I could use to do away with the two handed argument. Just because an Ogre can wield it in one hand or two, the weapon is simply so small that the amount of useful force behind the item is small. This is perhaps the same reason STR shouldn't add to finesse weapons.

I'm playing devil's advocate a bit, but hopefully my argument makes some sense.Maybe instead of 1/2 str as an add, perhaps just a flat +1 (or die size increaes as suggested earlier). That has no scaling and very predictable results/issues.

Does this mean a dwarf could pick up a weapon and wield it in two hand for two die size increases. Very interesting result - eh?

I don't think that, even if the weapon is fairly small, wielding with two hands is going to be much of a disadvantage. If you hold a knife with a long-enough handle in two hands, I am sure you can stab things with much greater power than you could with one hand. Although you would have a smaller range of motion than using it with a single hand.

But, if we are talking about a larger, heavier weapon-- then holding it with two hands is certain to allow you to strike with greater power and would allow for greater stability for blocking or parrying blows.

In fact, all considered, I might be willing to consider wielding a medium weapon with two hands a legitimate interpretation of the old Power Attack mechanic. It might be a bit harder to hit, but you are going to do more damage.

I could make a case for dropping accuracy (because of the more limited range of motion) and bumping the damage die or adding a bonus to the damage. Say, -2 / +2.

Perhaps this makes sense. Maybe water it down to -1/+1. I just don't want the bonus to be large to limit the power of the glass cannon.

So would a weapon that MUST be wielded two handed get this bonus?So if you want to use a greatsword, you must take the -1/+1?

No, I would limit this to weapons that a) are normally wielded 1-handed and have a hilt or grip that allows effective 2-handed use, or b) are designed to be used either 1- or 2-handed from the beginning.

There is sort of a problem about basing an ability you are going to be able to use at level 1 and at level 20 or 30 on a base +1/-1 or +2/-2.

At level one, those modifiers can seem like a fairly substantial swing. Well, they are...

Regardless of one's level, a +1 or -1 is the equivalent of a +5% or -5% chance to hit any particular thing. As you get high level, you get plenty of +1 bonuses from various sources-- increased attributes, BAB, magical equipment, often utilized spells, etc. Once one has a +20 to hit, a +1 or -1 seems to reduce in importance... except that your equally-leveled challenges have been increasing AC at the same rate. So, in the end, the +1 or -1 still equals out to a 5% difference either way.

Now, how about damage? Well, if you are rolling a d8 then your average damage is 4. A +1 is basically a 25% increase in your damage. If you are playing a character with a maximum strength (18 unless you are an orc or something) then you roll 1d8+4. Your average damage is 8. A +1 increases your damage by 12.5%-- still a much larger difference than the 5% you are losing. This also means a strong character really gains only half the benefit a weak character would from this.

But what about when you get to higher levels? Once your get your +3 magical weapon that deals an extra +1d6 fire damage, once you have features or skills that give you a +2 to your overall damage, once your increase your strength to 20? Okay, then you are rolling 1d8+10. Your average damage is 17. Surprisingly enough a +1 increase is still a +5.8% increase in your damage which means you are still gaining more than you are losing, but it is no where near the shift it used to be. And it certainly won't make up for the fact that you could be wielding a shield or second weapon in that hand instead.

There is sort of a problem about basing an ability you are going to be able to use at level 1 and at level 20 or 30 on a base +1/-1 or +2/-2.

At level one, those modifiers can seem like a fairly substantial swing. Well, they are...

Regardless of one's level, a +1 or -1 is the equivalent of a +5% or -5% chance to hit any particular thing. As you get high level, you get plenty of +1 bonuses from various sources-- increased attributes, BAB, magical equipment, often utilized spells, etc. Once one has a +20 to hit, a +1 or -1 seems to reduce in importance... except that your equally-leveled challenges have been increasing AC at the same rate. So, in the end, the +1 or -1 still equals out to a 5% difference either way.

Now, how about damage? Well, if you are rolling a d8 then your average damage is 4. A +1 is basically a 25% increase in your damage. If you are playing a character with a maximum strength (18 unless you are an orc or something) then you roll 1d8+4. Your average damage is 8. A +1 increases your damage by 12.5%-- still a much larger difference than the 5% you are losing. This also means a strong character really gains only half the benefit a weak character would from this.

But what about when you get to higher levels? Once your get your +3 magical weapon that deals an extra +1d6 fire damage, once you have features or skills that give you a +2 to your overall damage, once your increase your strength to 20? Okay, then you are rolling 1d8+10. Your average damage is 17. Surprisingly enough a +1 increase is still a +5.8% increase in your damage which means you are still gaining more than you are losing, but it is no where near the shift it used to be. And it certainly won't make up for the fact that you could be wielding a shield or second weapon in that hand instead.

Aren't we talking about 5th edition, though, where a +20 to hit isn't going to happen, while damage can get boosted rapidly?

In the case of the long sword the second hand offers no benifit and in fact hinders your range of motion.

I guess you never grasped a longsword then?

Or a baseball bat, for that matter.

Quoting both so I can reply to each thing in one post. It's a two-fer! :-)

Anyway, first: well, depends on what your definition of "longsword" is, I suppose. What D&D calls a longsword isn't.

As for the baseball bat - very, very different swing. Try a baseball bat swing with a sword sometime against a competent swordsman and watch how fast you get "killed." Or, depending on the group, kicked out of the list for being exceptionally unsafe. In any event, swinging a baseball bat and swinging a sword are two different things (as is, say, swinging a baseball bat and a golf club, for instance - just because something can be swung with both hands doesn't mean it's the same style of swing).

For those confused on how DDN's modular rules might work, this may provide some insight: http://www.tor.com/blogs/2012/11/the-world-of-darkness-shines-when-it-abandons-canon

@mikemearls: Uhhh... do you really not see all the 3e/4e that's basically the entire core system?

It is entirely unnecessary to denigrate someone else's approach to gaming in order to validate your own.

List of no-action attacks.Dynamic vs Static BonusesPhalanx tactics and buildsCrivens! A Pictsies GuideGood
Powers to intentionally miss withMr. Cellophane: How to be unnoticedWay's to fire around cornersCrits: what their really worthRetroactive bonus vs Static bonus.Runepriest handbook & discussion threadHoly Symbols to hang around your neckWays to Gain or Downgrade ActionsList of bonuses to saving throwsThe Ghost with the Most (revenant handbook)

Pocket Protector Pixie Stealth Knight. Maximizing the defender's aura by being in an ally's/enemy's square.

Yakuza NinjIntimiAdin: Perma-stealth Striker that offers a little protection for ally's, and can intimidate bloodied enemies. Very Strong.

Chargeburgler with cheese Ranged attacks at the end of a charge along with perma-stealth. Solid, could be overpowered if tweaked.

Void Defender Defends giving a penalty to hit anyone but him, then removing himself from play. Can get somewhat broken in epic.

Scry and Die Attacking from around corners, while staying hidden. Moderate to broken, depending on the situation.

Skimisher Fly in, attack, and fly away. Also prevents enemies from coming close. Moderate to Broken depending on the enemy, but shouldn't make the game un-fun, as the rest of your team is at risk, and you have enough weaknesses.

Indestructible Simply won't die, even if you sleep though combat. One of THE most abusive character in 4e.

Death's Gatekeeper A fun twist on a healic, making your party "unkillable". Overpowered to Broken, but shouldn't actually make the game un-fun, just TPK proof.

Death's Gatekeeper mk2, (Stealth Edition) Make your party "unkillable", and you hidden, while doing solid damage. Stronger then the above, but also easier for a DM to shut down. Broken, until your DM get's enough of it.

Domination and Death Dominate everything then kill them quickly. Only works @ 30, but is broken multiple ways.

I really like the system they have in place now. As it is right now, using a 1 handed weapon allows using a shield. Take Longsword vs Greatsword, you exchange 1 extra damage for 1 extra AC. While not PERFECTLY balanced, it's still much preferable to granting 1.5x str mod and having 2h weapons dominate everything.

I'm in favour of allowing characters swinging a one handed martial weapon with two hands to bump up one damage die size

...and take Disadvantage on the attack because the weapon isn't balanced for that.

If you are already at Disadvantage, or very confident of your chance to hit, it's worth it. Otherwise not so much. And you don't have to juggle +1/-2/+1 blah blah, which this edition is trying hard to avoid.

(And it benefits stronger/higher level characters more, because they are more likely to be able to hit even with Disadvantage.)

I'm in favour of allowing characters swinging a one handed martial weapon with two hands to bump up one damage die size

...and take Disadvantage on the attack because the weapon isn't balanced for that.

If you are already at Disadvantage, or very confident of your chance to hit, it's worth it. Otherwise not so much. And you don't have to juggle +1/-2/+1 blah blah, which this edition is trying hard to avoid.

(And it benefits stronger/higher level characters more, because they are more likely to be able to hit even with Disadvantage.)

I don't see any real value arguing the physics of this. I do think that two-handed weapons should do on avearge more than other weapons just as a point of game design. If you want defense, go sword and board. If you want to pulverize something, pick up a big weapon and swing. Some bonus damage needs to be added to make it worth while.

I'd be happy with something as simple as "all two handed (heavy) weapons get +2 to damage." They could write it right into the weapon profiles. As is current, (as was with early 4th) I'm not seeing a compelling reason to chose a two-handed weapon over a weapon and shield style of fighting.

I also have no issue with them bringing back versitle from 4e, which allowed you to two hand certain one-handed weapons.

I don't see any real value arguing the physics of this. I do think that two-handed weapons should do on avearge more than other weapons just as a point of game design. If you want defense, go sword and board. If you want to pulverize something, pick up a big weapon and swing. Some bonus damage needs to be added to make it worth while.

Why can't someone use a 1h weapon for attacking? I had a fighter one time that left 1 hand open to do random stuff with, which is now easier AND more interesting with 5th ed. This isn't WoW, people who want to do damage should HAVE to use two handed weapons. That's limiting options for no real reason, which is always a bad thing.

This may be a stretch to for some people to grasp but I believe two handed weapons should get +1 to hit.

The rater small damage bonus becomes fairly insignificant compared to the 6d12 CS dice or the +8 from strength and a magic weapon the fighter has at higher levels. A +1 to hit gives a percentage increase in damage that is equally effective over the course of a warriors while career. The +1 AC from a shield offers a similar percentage increase to defenses that is equally useful across all levels.

Also when considering the fluid nature of D&D combat and that a "hit" does not necessarily represent a blow that connects with your foe, +1 to hit makes more sense for longer reach heavier two handed weapons. It is much harder to block, dodge, or parry a big two handed weapon. This roughly translates into an accuracy bonus in D&D terms.

For what it's worth, many of the larger 1h weapons in 4e (like the longsword) had a property called "Versatile," which meant that when weilded in 2 hands got +1 damage (surprisingly similar to the 2e method mentioned in an earlier post). The idea was not that if you wanted to swing with two hands that a longsword would be as good as a greatsword - never gonna be the case, and that's fine. But, it gives you a bonus if you find yourself without a shield, or your class can't use shields, or your class likes having an open hand for whatever reason, etc. It's a nice piece of flexibility that also makes sense to the mind.

The bonus is built into the weapon. 2-handed weapons have a larger damage size (or some other feature like reach).

how would you then treat long sword swung with two hands? same damage? Or mace? I guarantee you that the effect is bigger.

Or lets say Ogre with 22 str grabs a human sized greatsword. he can wield it effectively with one hand for 1d12+6 dmg. but what if he grabs it with two hands(the grip IS long enough)? damage still the same?

it goes from d8 to d10, and the term is bastard sword. :D

"Trying to run gritty gothic horror with 4e is like trying to cut down a tree with a hammer, likewise trying to run heroic fantasy with 1e is like trying to hammer a nail with a chainsaw."